quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
He went undrafted. If he was the amazing and under utilized weapon some of you guys believe he was, somebody would have used at least a late round pick on him.
Agree, I have to laugh every time I see someone post how "talented" or "under utilized" a certain player is, as if they know more than the coaching staff of a D1 program.
So you're saying a coaching staff/OC that gave him 4 carries against LSU when he was the only back gaining big chunks of yards didn't under utilize him?
No, what I am saying is that I'm gonna trust the coaching staff to do their job and know what talent they have over the Monday morning QB's out there that base talent utilization on 4 runs.
Or you could be a so called "monday morning QB" and base the talent evaluation on 3 years of pulling Trey when he was hot. Have you ever thought that a coach has too much invested in "his guys" and doesn't want to go away from them no matter what happens? Call it being the doghouse but Trey should have started over EVERY other back besides Cmike. Nobody rushed, caught, cut or had the speed that Trey does. I could do a stat analysis if you want and against SEC opponents.
I agree with this. Folks that think coaches don't make mistakes make me laugh. Why would a coach not want the ball in the hands of the guy that had the most (6+) yards per carry over a three-year period? Because he couldn't block? Well, guess what, the other backs were not as dangerous with the ball in their hand. Trey was the most likely guy in the backfield to break off a 20- 30 yard gain. Let the guy freelance. As a freshman, had 1.1 yards per carry more than CMike and .1 less than Malena. In that case, Malena should have been #1. He was a better blocker
and just as good at getting yards.
What does it say about the scheme and coaching when the coaches are not happy with their most productive back? You have two 5-star backs and yet your run game sucks. Sure, given more attempts, the defences would start to key on Trey, but his statistical history shows that he is a hard guy to get a hold of. Also, defences were keying on WRs running 5-10 yards routes anyway. Did you see Spav doing anything to change that? No, he kept doing the same **** over and over again. Every defence knew a run play was coming and knew most of the passes early in the season were going to be short. Bama knew exactly what to expect on every play. But by all means don't question a young OCs knowledge or coaching ability.
If anyone thinks the running game was handled well last year, I'd love to hear how you come to that conclusion. There were things the staff f'd up last year for sure. The biggest being not having an effective run game in place to take pressure off of Kenny Hill. We had three quality backs that all had nice YPC averages. Running a two back set should have been considered. Is it smart to go four and five wide with one back when you have two fish QBs facing the toughest division? What would have been so difficult about using Carson and TWill together? Last year should have seen a closer to equal run to pass ratio just to help out the young QBs. Then start moving back to Sumlin's optimal scheme when your OC and QBs are more comfortable and experienced.
I stated this several times last year and most had the canned "I think the coaches know more than you." Well, they do but that doesn't mean they get it all right. This year, they're making the change a year late.
